The Government of Guyana will be formally writing to the Venezuelan Government and the United Nations about the “illegal, aggressive and hostile act” perpetrated yesterday by the Venezuelan Navy which intercepted a research vessel subcontracted by ExxonMobil to work in Guyana’s territory.
In a statement to the Nation last evening, Minister of Foreign Affairs Carl Greenidge explained that the oil giant had informed government that at 10:30 am yesterday the Ramform Tethys was intercepted while operating in the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf of Guyana.
“The vessel flagged by the Commonwealth of Bahamas has 70 crew members including the Captain and was intercepted at approximately 140 km from the nearest point on the provisional equidistant line with Venezuela,” Greenidge explained.
He stressed that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs rejects the illegal, aggressive and hostile act perpetrated by the Venezuelan government which he said once again demonstrates the real threat to Guyana’s economic development posed by its western neighbour.
The Ministry he noted will be bringing this latest act of illegality and blatant disrespect, “an Act which violates sovereignty and territorial integrity of our border” to the attention of the United Nations.
It is also in the process of informing the seven governments of the 70 crew members of the threat to their safety and issuing a formal communication to the Venezuelan government.
ExxonMobil issued a release early in the day in which it stated that all seismic activities on the Stabroek Block have been paused until they can be safely continued.
“Our main concern is for the safety of crew members and others in the area,” the company indicated adding that they are currently in contact with the relevant authorities.
The company which has so far discovered 10 viable prospects for oil extraction indicated that 3-D seismic data acquisition of the western portion of the Stabroek Block began this month.
Additionally the owners of the vessel Norwegian Company Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) confirmed that that the vessel was approached by a Venezuelan navy ship while working on a project offshore Guyana.
According to Bard Stenberg, Senior Vice President IR and Corporate Communications, the company which is an Exxonmobil subcontractor, is “operating in Guyana under the authority of the Guyanese government and have all necessary permits to perform this seismic survey.”
Following the encounter the vessel stopped seismic acquisition and headed east, Stenberg noted to Stabroek News, adding that they now know that the Venezuelan navy has withdrawn from the area where the Ramform Tethys is operating.
Beginning in May 2015 Exxon has consistently announced the discovery of significant number of viable oil reserves with the latest discovery at the Pluma-1 well announced earlier this month.
The discovery follows previous discoveries on the Stabroek block at Hammerhead, Pacora, Liza, Payara, Liza Deep, Snoek, Turbot, Ranger, and Longtail. According to the company estimated recoverable resource for the Stabroek Block now stands at more than five billion oil-equivalent barrels.
Anadarko
Yesterday’s action was reminiscent of the 2013 interception of Anadarko’s exploration of the Roraima Block in the ultra-deep-water offshore Guyana.
The US petroleum giant had its programme of exploration for offshore Guyana for 2013 abruptly halted on October 10, when a corvette from the Venezuelan Navy intercepted the seismic exploring vessel, MV Teknik Perdana and directed it to steam towards the Venezuelan island of Margarita. The MV Teknik Perdana was indirectly under contract with Anadarko to explore the Roraima Block with a view to determining whether commercial quantities of hydrocarbon existed.
According to one of the company’s corporate reports for 2013, it had planned 2D Seismic surveys of the Roraima Block for 2013. It said too that Guyana had proven oil producing areas in which multiple play types had been identified.
After the release of the vessel by Venezuela, talks between the foreign ministers of Guyana and Venezuela resulted in a decision to have the countries’ technical experts meet in four months to discuss maritime delimitation. They also reiterated that dialogue and cooperation were the means for a peaceful solution of differences between States. These talks were never held as Venezuela provided a list of excuses leaving Takuba Lodge with the view that there was never any intention to have any type of talks which could permit Anadarko to resume its work.
In 2015 following ExxonMobil’s first discovery Anadarko representatives visited Guyana and held discussions with Minister of Natural Resources Raphael Trotman and other officials of the sector and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The objective of the visit, according to a statement released at the time, was to provide an update to the Minister on the company’s proposed work programme for the development of hydrocarbons in Guyana.
The statement noted that Anadarko Guyana Company “expressed how keen it is to recommence its activities” while Trotman assured the representatives that the Government will continue to take relevant measures to preserve its sovereignty.
Since then Guyana has applied to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to have the matter of the border controversy with Venezuela definitively settled.
After decades of the Good Offices process under UN auspices failed to resolve the border controversy, Guyana on March 29th, 2018, filed an application with the ICJ requesting that it confirm the legal validity and binding effect of the 1899 arbitral award settling the boundaries between British Guiana and Venezuela.
As a result of Guyana’s application on March 29th, the ICJ in early June announced that it would receive the Representatives of Venezuela and of Guyana on June 18th, 2018, in order to know the points of view of the parties regarding procedural issues in Georgetown’s move for a juridical settlement of the controversy.
It was at this meeting that Venezuela advised the ICJ that it would not be taking part in the process and did not recognize the court’s jurisdiction.
The Court therefore pointed out that in the circumstances of the case, it must first settle the question of its jurisdiction and that “this question should accordingly be separately determined before any proceedings on the merits” of the matter filed by Guyana.
Consequently as of November 19, Guyana has submitted its memorial pertaining to the question of whether the court has jurisdiction to adjudicate over a juridical settlement of the long-running border controversy between the two countries.
